Search
Paper Girls: Volume 1
Cliff Chiang, Brian K. Vaughan, Matthew Wilson and Jared K. Fletcher
8.4
Rate It
Book
From Brian K. Vaughan, #1 New York Times bestselling writer of SAGA, and Cliff Chiang, legendary...
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Sin City (2005) in Movies
Jan 7, 2021 (Updated Jan 11, 2021)
I absolutely adored Sin City when it first released way back in 2005, and I still do to a point, albeit a little less than I used to.
The main positives are of course the cast, and the style.
The cast is stacked - Bruce Willis, Rosario Dawson, Benicio Del Toro, Brittany Murphy, Michael Madsen, Clive Owen, Micky Rourke, Jessica Alba, Elijah Wood, Powers Boothe, Devon Aoki, Rutger Hauer, Michael Clarke Duncan, Carla Gugino, Jaime King... that's a fair ensemble if you ask me.
The style is of course a huge part of Sin City. It's neo noir black and white with splashes of colour translate perfectly from page to screen. 15 years later, the effects still look pretty decent and the overall look of the film is practically watching the graphic novels come to life, a strength that is bolstered by the cast involved.
It has a cheesy yet engaging screenplay - the runtime clocks in at over two hours, but never gets boring (just about), and the constant growly voiceovers and on the nose script beats could have potentially been laughable in anyone else's hands, but Robert Rodriguez somehow gets away with it.
The comics ultraviolence is well realised - the movie doesn't shy away from the grimness of proceedings. Some of the content however feels a little problematic in this day and age. The whole thing is plagued by a steady stream of misogyny, which would have probably been toned down if released today, but in my opinion, it's never glamorised. 95% of the male characters are grim shitbags, and the audience know it well.
I understand why a fair few people have an issue with Sin City and it's content, but personally, I find it to be a unique film with plenty of positives, a project that respects it's source material, and just about manages to avoid falling inside of its own arse.
The main positives are of course the cast, and the style.
The cast is stacked - Bruce Willis, Rosario Dawson, Benicio Del Toro, Brittany Murphy, Michael Madsen, Clive Owen, Micky Rourke, Jessica Alba, Elijah Wood, Powers Boothe, Devon Aoki, Rutger Hauer, Michael Clarke Duncan, Carla Gugino, Jaime King... that's a fair ensemble if you ask me.
The style is of course a huge part of Sin City. It's neo noir black and white with splashes of colour translate perfectly from page to screen. 15 years later, the effects still look pretty decent and the overall look of the film is practically watching the graphic novels come to life, a strength that is bolstered by the cast involved.
It has a cheesy yet engaging screenplay - the runtime clocks in at over two hours, but never gets boring (just about), and the constant growly voiceovers and on the nose script beats could have potentially been laughable in anyone else's hands, but Robert Rodriguez somehow gets away with it.
The comics ultraviolence is well realised - the movie doesn't shy away from the grimness of proceedings. Some of the content however feels a little problematic in this day and age. The whole thing is plagued by a steady stream of misogyny, which would have probably been toned down if released today, but in my opinion, it's never glamorised. 95% of the male characters are grim shitbags, and the audience know it well.
I understand why a fair few people have an issue with Sin City and it's content, but personally, I find it to be a unique film with plenty of positives, a project that respects it's source material, and just about manages to avoid falling inside of its own arse.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Polar (2019) in Movies
Feb 7, 2019 (Updated Feb 7, 2019)
Extremely Polarizing
Wow, what a train wreck this turned out to be..
Think diet John Wick meets an immature, garish comic book full of pantomime villains and you have Polar. Sometimes you see a movie and can't help but wonder, "What the hell were they thinking?" Unfortunately this is one of those times. There are folks out there that have crafted a solid script and are struggling to get their movie funded and made, meanwhile there is low level trash like this being paid for and distributed by a huge platform like Netflix?! It is an outrageous and pretty sad state of affairs.
Without a doubt the worst part of this thing is the god awful assortment of villains. They are so annoying and infuriating in every scene they are in and only get worse as the movie goes on. Half the movie is spent following this massively irritating group as they hunt for Mads Mikkelsen's character and they are so unlikable, but not in the way that they are supposed to be. They all work for the main villain, who is inexplicably played by Matt Lucas from Little Britain. That's right, Vicky Pollard is this movie's main antagonist. He is god awful here and I genuinely don't even know what they were attempting to do with this character. Every scene that he is in feels like a discarded Little Britain sketch.
The one bright spot in the film is Mads Mikkelsen's turn as Duncan, the ex-hitman being hunted throughout the film by his ex-employers who serves as our main protagonist. I love seeing Mads in anything he appears in, so I actually found the scenes with him in them pretty enjoyable, and frankly they were the only thing that stopped this movie from being scored a pathetic 1/10.
Overall, this is total mess. It is the worst type of comic book movie and doesn't seem appealing to anyone over the age of 12. Please don't waste your time with this garbage, there are much better movies out there based on graphic novels that don't only cater to horny, brain-dead teenagers.
Think diet John Wick meets an immature, garish comic book full of pantomime villains and you have Polar. Sometimes you see a movie and can't help but wonder, "What the hell were they thinking?" Unfortunately this is one of those times. There are folks out there that have crafted a solid script and are struggling to get their movie funded and made, meanwhile there is low level trash like this being paid for and distributed by a huge platform like Netflix?! It is an outrageous and pretty sad state of affairs.
Without a doubt the worst part of this thing is the god awful assortment of villains. They are so annoying and infuriating in every scene they are in and only get worse as the movie goes on. Half the movie is spent following this massively irritating group as they hunt for Mads Mikkelsen's character and they are so unlikable, but not in the way that they are supposed to be. They all work for the main villain, who is inexplicably played by Matt Lucas from Little Britain. That's right, Vicky Pollard is this movie's main antagonist. He is god awful here and I genuinely don't even know what they were attempting to do with this character. Every scene that he is in feels like a discarded Little Britain sketch.
The one bright spot in the film is Mads Mikkelsen's turn as Duncan, the ex-hitman being hunted throughout the film by his ex-employers who serves as our main protagonist. I love seeing Mads in anything he appears in, so I actually found the scenes with him in them pretty enjoyable, and frankly they were the only thing that stopped this movie from being scored a pathetic 1/10.
Overall, this is total mess. It is the worst type of comic book movie and doesn't seem appealing to anyone over the age of 12. Please don't waste your time with this garbage, there are much better movies out there based on graphic novels that don't only cater to horny, brain-dead teenagers.
Louise (64 KP) rated Sex Criminals, Vol. 1: One Weird Trick in Books
Jul 2, 2018
When I saw this making the rounds on booktube, I thought I must read it, it sounds amazing and nothing I have never read before. It appears graphic novels and comics are popular once again.
First of all I want to mention just how amazing the artwork in this book is and the colours are so pretty as can be seen above.
I had to read this twice as I just wasn't sure first time round, I took my time reading this once again and I stand by my initial thoughts that this book is ok but could be better.
The story just jumps all over the place, you will be reading about current happenings and then it will jump to the future and I was just like huh! whats going on? and getting very confused! (it's not difficult)
I didn't feel any connection with the main characters John and Suze they just meet at a party have sex, realise they can both stop time and John reminiscing on the first time he realised he could do it.
The premise of the books sounds great and had me hooked but it was just ok. - John and Suze find that they can both stop time when they climax, so they make a plan to rob the bank to fund the library that is closing down.
There is also a part that refers to all women in the sex industry must have been abused in there younger days which I found very stereotypical, not funny and could be offensive to some readers.
Also there is sex police! Yes you heard me right! SEX POLICE!!
The humour on this novel was very crude or could be called 'Bathroom humour,' there is a lot of sexual content and pictures so if you are easily offended this is not the book for you.
So overall this book was just MEH! It had it pro's but unfortunately was outweighed by the cons. I am not sure if I will be continuing on with this series, I think I need to see what other people think first.
I rate this 3 out of 5 stars.
First of all I want to mention just how amazing the artwork in this book is and the colours are so pretty as can be seen above.
I had to read this twice as I just wasn't sure first time round, I took my time reading this once again and I stand by my initial thoughts that this book is ok but could be better.
The story just jumps all over the place, you will be reading about current happenings and then it will jump to the future and I was just like huh! whats going on? and getting very confused! (it's not difficult)
I didn't feel any connection with the main characters John and Suze they just meet at a party have sex, realise they can both stop time and John reminiscing on the first time he realised he could do it.
The premise of the books sounds great and had me hooked but it was just ok. - John and Suze find that they can both stop time when they climax, so they make a plan to rob the bank to fund the library that is closing down.
There is also a part that refers to all women in the sex industry must have been abused in there younger days which I found very stereotypical, not funny and could be offensive to some readers.
Also there is sex police! Yes you heard me right! SEX POLICE!!
The humour on this novel was very crude or could be called 'Bathroom humour,' there is a lot of sexual content and pictures so if you are easily offended this is not the book for you.
So overall this book was just MEH! It had it pro's but unfortunately was outweighed by the cons. I am not sure if I will be continuing on with this series, I think I need to see what other people think first.
I rate this 3 out of 5 stars.
Shonen Jump Manga Reader
Book and Magazines & Newspapers
App
The official English source to read Weekly Shonen Jump, the world's most popular manga magazine! You...
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated DC League of Super Pets (2022) in Movies
Aug 2, 2022
I had hoped for something lighthearted and amusing, I definitely didn't expect what I got.
When the safety of Superman, and the world, is threatened by a bald supervillain, Krypto must step in to save the day. Ordinarily, that would be easy, but not today, today he's going to need some help.
You've got to love the classic tail tale of man's best friend. Add in some superpowers and you're really on to something, the whole family well covered. Friendship, loss, insecurity, lots of lessons for the kids, and a surprising amount of bleeped dialogue and jokes for the adults.
Each Super-Pet goes through their own little journey, and though most of the interactions are between the pets, or between the humans, when the two crossover it's handled really well. The simple transition from Kate McKinnon waxing lyrical about villainy, to guinea pig squeaks is surprisingly hilarious.
You can't really find fault with the voice cast. Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart are always wonderful together, and I can honestly visualise them doing some of the recording together with the physical acting. McKinnon's villainy is second to none, and her reactions to scenes... *chef's kiss*.
But can we talk about Keanu? Who has started the petition for him to play IRL Batman? We need it.
The animation is simple, that's not meant in a negative way. It feels very much in line with graphic novels, there's great attention to detail, but it doesn't distract from what's in the foreground. The expressions, the human/pet interactions, every reaction is captured perfectly. Just watch for the ear bouncing and tail twitching if you don't believe me!
I went in hoping for something amusing, I came out having seen one of the best superhero movies I've ever seen. If it had songs I may have bumped it up above Teen Titans GO! To The Movies... but also, they play no crystals. So it's a very close second place.
Oh, and, just saying... if they wanted to scrap everything live action in the DCEU, animate it, and add Super-Pets... I wouldn't be mad.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/07/dc-league-of-super-pets-movie-review.html
When the safety of Superman, and the world, is threatened by a bald supervillain, Krypto must step in to save the day. Ordinarily, that would be easy, but not today, today he's going to need some help.
You've got to love the classic tail tale of man's best friend. Add in some superpowers and you're really on to something, the whole family well covered. Friendship, loss, insecurity, lots of lessons for the kids, and a surprising amount of bleeped dialogue and jokes for the adults.
Each Super-Pet goes through their own little journey, and though most of the interactions are between the pets, or between the humans, when the two crossover it's handled really well. The simple transition from Kate McKinnon waxing lyrical about villainy, to guinea pig squeaks is surprisingly hilarious.
You can't really find fault with the voice cast. Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart are always wonderful together, and I can honestly visualise them doing some of the recording together with the physical acting. McKinnon's villainy is second to none, and her reactions to scenes... *chef's kiss*.
But can we talk about Keanu? Who has started the petition for him to play IRL Batman? We need it.
The animation is simple, that's not meant in a negative way. It feels very much in line with graphic novels, there's great attention to detail, but it doesn't distract from what's in the foreground. The expressions, the human/pet interactions, every reaction is captured perfectly. Just watch for the ear bouncing and tail twitching if you don't believe me!
I went in hoping for something amusing, I came out having seen one of the best superhero movies I've ever seen. If it had songs I may have bumped it up above Teen Titans GO! To The Movies... but also, they play no crystals. So it's a very close second place.
Oh, and, just saying... if they wanted to scrap everything live action in the DCEU, animate it, and add Super-Pets... I wouldn't be mad.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/07/dc-league-of-super-pets-movie-review.html
Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated House of M in Books
Nov 30, 2020
*** <i>Read the entire story while listening to Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross' score to GONE GIRL. Not saying it would be for everyone, but it definitely worked for my re-reading.</i>
I have mentioned this in my graphic novel reviews of late, that I have been doing a fair amount of re-reads since making the transition to digital. It's such a delight to be able to read the comics again without fear of ruining the pages if I am eating or drinking! And best of all? The graphic novels (and books) read take up zero space, helping me to continue to maintain a minimalist lifestyle.
Okay, on to the review..
I originally read the HOUSE OF M about a year or so after it was published in trade paperback. At that time, I recall liking it well enough, thinking that Bendis did a good job. It was not good enough, at that time, to leave a lasting impression on me, unlike other Marvel events before it. With the move to digital, and with a price I could not refuse, I felt it was time to revisit the series and see how it would fare with my not-as-cluttered mental state.
First, let me just <b>"WOW!"</b>. No, seriously! For a re-read, it felt decidely fresh and much more engaging that it was for me first time out. The story was quite good, helping fulfill my Daily Minimum Requuirement of Angst Bendis wrote everyone in character, and he made it was easy to empathize with the characters, as they dealt with effects of the world presented in HOUSE OF M.
One thing that really made HOUSE OF M stand out, besides the story, was the art. Oliver Coipel's pencils were perfecting, offering clear expressions, helping to capture the mood(s) needed throughout! Coipel's was given some solid inkers to finish it: Tim Townsend, Rick Magyar, Scott Hanna, and John Dell. And let us not forget to mention the final icing on the cake: that super awesome coloring from Frank D'Armata. Seriously, a big hand goes out to all of this top notch collaborative effort!
I won't try to tell anyone how to read this, or anything for that matter. However, I will say that for my re-reading, I would stop every so often and reflect, to imagine what it must have been like for Wanda (Scarlet Witch) to have to live going forward after being told your children were just fabrications! And then, even further, to learn what she did at the end of HOUSE OF M! Seriously, regardless of whether you love or hate Bendis, this was heavy stuff to swallow! Sadly, it seems to been retconned by Marvel!
If you are tired of the current events "daisy chaining" that Marvel feels compelled to continue churning out, you could do a whole lot worse than HOUSE OF M. Bendis puts forward some interesting ideas, and seeing them play out is a hell of a good read! It is probably one of his best Marvel contributions, next to his DAREDEVIL! I urge you to give it a shot! You, like me, may need a second reading, but I think you will enjoy it!
Now, I am off to read the post-HOUSE OF M stuff, as well as AVENGERS: DISASSEMBLED, which leads into HOUSE OF M, and which I did not read when HOUSE OF M first came out.
I have mentioned this in my graphic novel reviews of late, that I have been doing a fair amount of re-reads since making the transition to digital. It's such a delight to be able to read the comics again without fear of ruining the pages if I am eating or drinking! And best of all? The graphic novels (and books) read take up zero space, helping me to continue to maintain a minimalist lifestyle.
Okay, on to the review..
I originally read the HOUSE OF M about a year or so after it was published in trade paperback. At that time, I recall liking it well enough, thinking that Bendis did a good job. It was not good enough, at that time, to leave a lasting impression on me, unlike other Marvel events before it. With the move to digital, and with a price I could not refuse, I felt it was time to revisit the series and see how it would fare with my not-as-cluttered mental state.
First, let me just <b>"WOW!"</b>. No, seriously! For a re-read, it felt decidely fresh and much more engaging that it was for me first time out. The story was quite good, helping fulfill my Daily Minimum Requuirement of Angst Bendis wrote everyone in character, and he made it was easy to empathize with the characters, as they dealt with effects of the world presented in HOUSE OF M.
One thing that really made HOUSE OF M stand out, besides the story, was the art. Oliver Coipel's pencils were perfecting, offering clear expressions, helping to capture the mood(s) needed throughout! Coipel's was given some solid inkers to finish it: Tim Townsend, Rick Magyar, Scott Hanna, and John Dell. And let us not forget to mention the final icing on the cake: that super awesome coloring from Frank D'Armata. Seriously, a big hand goes out to all of this top notch collaborative effort!
I won't try to tell anyone how to read this, or anything for that matter. However, I will say that for my re-reading, I would stop every so often and reflect, to imagine what it must have been like for Wanda (Scarlet Witch) to have to live going forward after being told your children were just fabrications! And then, even further, to learn what she did at the end of HOUSE OF M! Seriously, regardless of whether you love or hate Bendis, this was heavy stuff to swallow! Sadly, it seems to been retconned by Marvel!
If you are tired of the current events "daisy chaining" that Marvel feels compelled to continue churning out, you could do a whole lot worse than HOUSE OF M. Bendis puts forward some interesting ideas, and seeing them play out is a hell of a good read! It is probably one of his best Marvel contributions, next to his DAREDEVIL! I urge you to give it a shot! You, like me, may need a second reading, but I think you will enjoy it!
Now, I am off to read the post-HOUSE OF M stuff, as well as AVENGERS: DISASSEMBLED, which leads into HOUSE OF M, and which I did not read when HOUSE OF M first came out.
Cyn Armistead (14 KP) rated American Gods in Books
Mar 1, 2018
I'm trying to remember whether or not I've read any of Gaiman's other novels before, and I'm fairly certain that I haven't. I read [b:Good Omens|12067|Good Omens|Terry Pratchett|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1266659394s/12067.jpg|4110990], but that was co-written with [a:Terry Pratchett|1654|Terry Pratchett|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1235562205p2/1654.jpg], and the collaboration was genius. I know that the entire world seems to love Sandman, of course, but I'm just not a fan of graphic novels. In fact, it took me a while to realize that the Good Omens co-author and the Sandman author were one and the same.
I've certainly read some short stories, too. The most memorable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow,_Glass,_Apples">"Snow, Glass, Apples"</a> was reprinted in an anthology I read recently. I find it disturbing, so I won't re-read it. Well-written, of course—it wouldn't be so very memorably distressing if it weren't so masterfully done! (I found the <a href="http://www.holycow.com/dreaming/stories/snow-glass-apples">text online</a> if you care to read it, but please understand that the story deals with pedophilia, necrophilia, and incest here. It is the polar opposite of all things Disney.) Snow White was never one of of my favorite fairy tales, and Gaiman definitely pushed it much farther down the list.
In any case, I don't know what I was expecting from Gaiman, but <i>American Gods</i> wasn't it. I like stories with happy endings, and within the first few chapters I was fairly sure that there wouldn't be one. Is Gaiman fundamentally opposed to joy, or is it just happiness that he doesn't allow?
The novel is epic. It is masterful. All that stuff from the big critics is dead on. The book could be used as the backbone of a mythological scavenger hunt if a teacher were willing to run a very unstructured but engaging course that way. I certainly enjoyed that aspect of it, and it made me glad that I was reading it on my iTouch so that I could look up anything I liked online at any time, no matter where I happened to be (which was almost always at home or somewhere else that had wifi access, happily).
I seldom want to see illustrations in any book, but yes, I think I would like to see good pictures of some of the characters Gaiman described in this one. On the other hand, without artwork I spent time imagining what the characters looked like based on the descriptions. I don't normally stop to do that, as such matters as seldom relevant to a plot, but these beings caught my fancy. Not enough that I would sit through an entire graphic novel, I'm afraid, but if I saw one now I might flip through it to see how the artist's renderings compare with my versions.
I'm seldom able to identify an overall Theme to the books I read. Most of them, honestly, are fluff. I'm fine with that. I read them because they entertain me. <i>American Gods</i> is different. It is entertaining, but it isn't light or fluffy in the least. It definitely has an easily identifiably Theme and Tropes and all those elements that I recall from long-ago classes, the sorts of things that put me off from my original English major because I hated tearing other author's works apart instead of writing anything original. (Now, I begin to understand that we were being taught to recognize what makes for good writing so we might have some hope of possibly creating some of it one day.)
I somewhat timidly conclude that <i>American Gods</i> is the first piece of Literature I've read in a very long time, and well worth the time spent reading it. (I find it rather amusing that it would be British Literature, despite its title, due to the author's nationality.) I'm not going to state the theme, because that would be a spoiler, and I hate putting those in reviews—but it's something that I see as a Truth, and one that needs to be stated far more often, especiallly today. It's even more interesting that it took a Brit to say it.
The book is dark, although it does have some very bright spots in it. I will acknowledge that I was going through a particularly bad time with regards to my health when I was reading it, but I still think it might be best for some people to read this one when in a fairly positive state of mind.
I've certainly read some short stories, too. The most memorable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow,_Glass,_Apples">"Snow, Glass, Apples"</a> was reprinted in an anthology I read recently. I find it disturbing, so I won't re-read it. Well-written, of course—it wouldn't be so very memorably distressing if it weren't so masterfully done! (I found the <a href="http://www.holycow.com/dreaming/stories/snow-glass-apples">text online</a> if you care to read it, but please understand that the story deals with pedophilia, necrophilia, and incest here. It is the polar opposite of all things Disney.) Snow White was never one of of my favorite fairy tales, and Gaiman definitely pushed it much farther down the list.
In any case, I don't know what I was expecting from Gaiman, but <i>American Gods</i> wasn't it. I like stories with happy endings, and within the first few chapters I was fairly sure that there wouldn't be one. Is Gaiman fundamentally opposed to joy, or is it just happiness that he doesn't allow?
The novel is epic. It is masterful. All that stuff from the big critics is dead on. The book could be used as the backbone of a mythological scavenger hunt if a teacher were willing to run a very unstructured but engaging course that way. I certainly enjoyed that aspect of it, and it made me glad that I was reading it on my iTouch so that I could look up anything I liked online at any time, no matter where I happened to be (which was almost always at home or somewhere else that had wifi access, happily).
I seldom want to see illustrations in any book, but yes, I think I would like to see good pictures of some of the characters Gaiman described in this one. On the other hand, without artwork I spent time imagining what the characters looked like based on the descriptions. I don't normally stop to do that, as such matters as seldom relevant to a plot, but these beings caught my fancy. Not enough that I would sit through an entire graphic novel, I'm afraid, but if I saw one now I might flip through it to see how the artist's renderings compare with my versions.
I'm seldom able to identify an overall Theme to the books I read. Most of them, honestly, are fluff. I'm fine with that. I read them because they entertain me. <i>American Gods</i> is different. It is entertaining, but it isn't light or fluffy in the least. It definitely has an easily identifiably Theme and Tropes and all those elements that I recall from long-ago classes, the sorts of things that put me off from my original English major because I hated tearing other author's works apart instead of writing anything original. (Now, I begin to understand that we were being taught to recognize what makes for good writing so we might have some hope of possibly creating some of it one day.)
I somewhat timidly conclude that <i>American Gods</i> is the first piece of Literature I've read in a very long time, and well worth the time spent reading it. (I find it rather amusing that it would be British Literature, despite its title, due to the author's nationality.) I'm not going to state the theme, because that would be a spoiler, and I hate putting those in reviews—but it's something that I see as a Truth, and one that needs to be stated far more often, especiallly today. It's even more interesting that it took a Brit to say it.
The book is dark, although it does have some very bright spots in it. I will acknowledge that I was going through a particularly bad time with regards to my health when I was reading it, but I still think it might be best for some people to read this one when in a fairly positive state of mind.
izneo BD Comics Manga
Book, Comics and Entertainment
1.0
Rate It
App
Izneo BD Comics Manga is the best app for French-Belgian comics, with thousands of digital comic...
